Posts Tagged ‘IT Contracts’

Creating a more “cloud-friendly” Europe

Monday, January 30th, 2012

At the World Economic Forum recently Neelie Kroes announced the setting up of the “Cloud Partnership”.

With it she announced a policy to increase the uptake of cloud computing throughout Europe through the creation of common standards and regulation, together with an initial investment of Euro 10 Million from the European Commission to make it happen.

Personally I’m always a little concerned by announcements to boost the economy through greater regulation. If however the policy results in greater uptake of cloud computing by the public sector (whether through true “public” clouds or through the greater use of “private” clouds), as common standards are agreed and accepted then there is a real chance of (much-needed) cost savings, which must be welcome.

Let’s hope an agreement on standards can be reached more quickly than agreement on the debt crisis, even if it does involve putting up with unnecessary repeated references by politicians to becoming “not just Cloud friendly but Cloud active”.

Posted by Richard Nicholas, who specialises in commercial, IT and outsourcing agreements, complex projects for private and public sector clients, collaboration, distribution & agency contracts, e-commerce and consumer law.

Richard Nicholas

Richard Nicholas
0121 237 3992
rnicholas@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Switching to cloud computing – a sensible move for the insurance CIO?

Thursday, April 28th, 2011

It’s always useful, when advising on issues such as cloud computing, to hear the views of CIOs, so I was delighted to be invited by Post Magazine to be part of a round table discussion on the subject – looking at cloud computing in the insurance sector.

To me, the benefits of cloud computing make a switch nearly inevitable, although there are some significant and justifiable fears about both data security and availability – particularly in the light of recent events, making the choice of a private cloud the more palatable option for critical business functions.

There are practical restraints on use of cloud computing in the insurance sector but the consensus was that these could be overcome. Indeed, several of those present were actively looking at a switch to cloud computing in the near future.

With the right contractual assurances and safeguards in place it seems cloud computing is coming – even to the (traditionally risk-averse) insurance sector.

Posted by Richard Nicholas, who specialises in commercial, IT and outsourcing agreements, complex projects for private and public sector clients, collaboration, distribution & agency contracts, e-commerce and consumer law.

Richard Nicholas

Richard Nicholas
0121 237 3992
rnicholas@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Are you infringing if you fail to pay a licence fee?

Tuesday, March 1st, 2011

I was always taught, that a company using intellectual property must necessarily either:

A) Own it; B) Be licensing it (from a third party); or C) Be infringing (a third party’s rights)

A case in the Patents County Court last month however has looked at the question – “if you are using copyright material under licence, but fail to pay the ongoing licence fee – are you therefore infringing the owner’s rights?” The answer was no – it is not necessarily an infringement. Even though you are in breach of the licence, so may be in breach of contract, it does not necessarily follow that you are infringing copyright, or that the licensor has a right to terminate the licence.

From a pure contract law perspective, this isn’t that surprising but is a reminder that if you don’t put express wording in a contract, the courts will not imply it for you (so it is worth getting the wording in at the start).

When and how contracts can be terminated for breach is an issue we’ll be covering at the next in house lawyers forums on 16th, 29th and 31st March. Please sign up here if you’d be interested in attending.

Posted by Richard Nicholas, who specialises in commercial, IT and outsourcing agreements, complex projects for private and public sector clients, collaboration, distribution & agency contracts, e-commerce and consumer law.

Richard Nicholas

Richard Nicholas
0121 237 3992
rnicholas@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)

Premature erection doesn’t stand up in court

Thursday, August 12th, 2010

What does ‘on completion of this agreement’ mean?

That’s the question that the high court had to decide, faced with a broadband business who had erected electronic communications equipment on the rooftops of certain council properties, including the Council’s own City Hall building.

The business was relying on a provision of a binding memorandum of understanding that allowed it access to council rooftops for this purpose for a period of 15 years, such access to be granted…’on completion of this agreement’. Was the licence enforcable?

Not according to Mr Justice Roth in City of Westminster v Urban Wimax who took into account the fact that a pilot scheme was clearly anticipated under the agreement and that the implicit intention was that the licence only be effective if this pilot scheme had proved sucessful. Urban Wimax were seeking to take advantage of the poor drafting of the memorandum of understanding to suggest that the licence took effect from execution of the agreement.

The council were perhaps lucky here not to have been lumbered with a licence that took effect too early and by the common sense approach of the court, but it is a warning where a pilot scheme is planned for a project (which often include the scantest legal wording), to check the wording of any licences granted, so as not to be embarrassed in court.

Richard Nicholas

Posted by Richard Nicholas
0121 237 3992
rnicholas@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

Tory Technology Treaty

Friday, March 19th, 2010

The campaigning has started by all the major parties, and anything said at this stage before an election is to be taken with a pinch of salt, but there are likely to be a fair few people whose attention might have been caught by the Conservative Technology Manifesto not least, anyone involved in public sector IT projects (as supplier or customer) any vendors of open source software, makers of smart meters and/or with an interest in data protection.

The document is a short one and, as with any pre-election material, has some positive suggestions in generic terms – an end to wasteful IT projects, a “right to data” policy and greater openness in most areas of public sector life, including publishing online all spending over £500 by local governments.

What might surprise some IT companies that contract with the public sector at the moment however, whatever their political persuasion, is the suggestion that contracts with local authorities that exceed certain thresholds (£500 for local authorities, £25,000 for central government and Quangos) will also be published “in full” – including in particular all performance indicators, break clauses and penalty measures. It’s a brave step and one that might highlight contracts that are overly favourable to suppliers and where the public sector is being unfairly penalised.

On the other hand – from the supplier’s perspective this raises issues of its own – “if you (large IT supplier) can provide those services and meet those service levels for that cost for the public sector, then why not for me, your prospective private sector customer?” There is a risk that too much transparency could mean public sector customers no longer get a better deal than the market.

And what about contracts provided by named “Key personnel” – will these individuals earn a celebrity of their own through contracts published online, or will data protection concerns override requirements in future legislation? Certainly the 35,000 most senior civil servants whose salaries are also required to be published online may have something to say if they can be identified from this information.

However this manifesto plays out, if, as currently predicted the conservatives are likely to be the next government, there are likely to be a few lively debates with the Office of the Information Commissioner before this manifesto becomes law.

Richard Nicholas

Posted by Richard Nicholas
0121 237 3992
rnicholas@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)

'We can deliver!' – Can these words expose you to unlimited liability?

Friday, January 29th, 2010

If they’re made dishonestly they might…

In particular, if you’re a provider of outsourcing services and make a statement that you:

  • can deliver a project within certain prescribed timescales and    
  • are making this statement having carried out a proper analysis of the work involved

Then, if your customer believes you, you may well find that your contractual limits on liability will not protect you, as one supplier found to their cost in the long awaited decision between BSkyB and EDS this month.

 It was held by the Judge that the statements made by the supplier were not only incorrect but were also dishonest, since the person making them knew them to be wrong.  

This allowed the customer to claim for Fraudulent Misrepresentation (under the Misrepresentation Act 1967).  Since liability for Fraudulent Misrepresentation cannot be limited, when the project went over-budget and missed the deadline, the supplier’s £30 Million cap on liability was ineffective. 

Liability has yet to be decided (and the case may be appealed) but the misleading statements made by the supplier may well mean that it now faces liability of £200 Million or more. 

The lesson for suppliers – if you’re bidding on a project be careful what claims you make about your ability to deliver and never claim to have assessed the risk unless you truly have.  Given the recent history of IT projects delivered late and over budget in the public sector  I suspect there will be a number of customers scanning emails in the light of this case to see what optimistic IT providers might have promised.

Richard Nicholas

Posted by Richard Nicholas
0121 237 3992
rnicholas@brownejacobson.com

VN:F [1.9.11_1134]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)